You think our running game is the problem?

I know these forums are running rampant with trade rumors and how we need a running game SOOOO bad, but our running game had very little to do with us losing guys. What is the advantage of a running game? Well, it keeps defenses in pass only defense mode, ya, but did that really hurt Rodgers at all? But, you know what else playing the pass does? It opens up the short pass. Did you see how far off the safeties and corners were? And Rodgers picked on that all night. So many short passes all over the field is essesntially the same as having a running game. The short pass sets up the pass as well as a running game does.

And Rodgers capitalized on what the defense gave him and had the best game of the year so far. He completed over 75% of his passes and eclipsed 300 yards. And I don't wanna hear someone point out the pick. That doesn't really count as a minus. He just threw it up in the air and prayed.

"But, but that still doesn't solve the fact that when you run you control the clock!" Oh, contrar my friends. We controled the clock for 11 minutes longer than the bears did.

Point is, the fact that we threw so much had very little to do with us losing. We just had too many penalties, and of course, the fumble James Jones will have nightmares about. It is not our running game that needs to be fixed. We just need a better right tackle who can protect rodgers without trying to tackle and hold a guy, and not so many penalties. And we would have killed that team.

"But, but that still doesn't solve the fact that when you run you control the clock!" Oh, contrar my friends. We controled the clock for 11 minutes longer than the bears did.

Click to expand...

I love when people skew the facts to fit their POV.

Let's see... Reasons for greater time of possession...

1) Bears scored on a punt return
2) Bears first TD was scored on a short field due to horrible special teams
3) Bears game tying FG was scored on a short field due to the fumble + 30 yards of penalties
4) Bears game winning FG was scored on a short field due to the pass interference penalty

The Bears had a short field and quick scores all night long.

Once again, nobody is calling for a "top tier, blow-em out of the water running game". We just want better than 8 yards in the first half.

1) Bears scored on a punt return
2) Bears first TD was scored on a short field due to horrible special teams
3) Bears game tying FG was scored on a short field due to the fumble + 30 yards of penalties
4) Bears game winning FG was scored on a short field due to the pass interference penalty

The Bears had a short field and quick scores all night long.

Once again, nobody is calling for a "top tier, blow-em out of the water running game". We just want better than 8 yards in the first half.

Click to expand...

You can list reasons all you want, but 11 minutes of differential means the running game wasn't a problem. The PA passes were working also.

Problem is when you get to their endzone and penalty your way out of it, having to convert consistantly 2 and 20 and so on...

I know these forums are running rampant with trade rumors and how we need a running game SOOOO bad, but our running game had very little to do with us losing guys. What is the advantage of a running game? Well, it keeps defenses in pass only defense mode, ya, but did that really hurt Rodgers at all? But, you know what else playing the pass does? It opens up the short pass. Did you see how far off the safeties and corners were? And Rodgers picked on that all night. So many short passes all over the field is essesntially the same as having a running game. The short pass sets up the pass as well as a running game does.

And Rodgers capitalized on what the defense gave him and had the best game of the year so far. He completed over 75% of his passes and eclipsed 300 yards. And I don't wanna hear someone point out the pick. That doesn't really count as a minus. He just threw it up in the air and prayed.

"But, but that still doesn't solve the fact that when you run you control the clock!" Oh, contrar my friends. We controled the clock for 11 minutes longer than the bears did.

Point is, the fact that we threw so much had very little to do with us losing. We just had too many penalties, and of course, the fumble James Jones will have nightmares about. It is not our running game that needs to be fixed. We just need a better right tackle who can protect rodgers without trying to tackle and hold a guy, and not so many penalties. And we would have killed that team.

Click to expand...

We lost because of the Special Teams and Penalties. BUT.......a running game would be nice! Don't ya think?

The lack of a running game is a problem. When your a one dimentional offense then you never have the defense off balance. They can just tee off on the quarterback. The bigger problem will come in Nov, Dec and Jan. when the field and football are frozen. It's hard to throw and catch a frozen football. Also forgot to mention the wind. The Packers are perceived to be a playoff team and hope to get home field advantage in the playoffs. If that should happen all of a sudden the conditions quite possible will effect what we do best, passing the football. At that point with no running game we're screwed. A lot of people like to mention that the Saints and Colts didn't have much of a running game last year and both went to the Super bowl. The difference there is they both had home field in the playoffs(Dome stadiums) which is tailor made for a pass happy offense. Lambeau Field in the winter is quite a different animal.

The biggest thing that a running game would provide is some relief on the tackles. The way DEs rush the quarterback and play the run are two VERY different play styles, and most of the holding penalties were caused by Chicago's DEs (Peppers really) being able to put their (his) head(s) down and rush every down as if it were a passing down.

Better run game = less holding penalties on pass plays. That's the biggest improvement it would bring to our team. All the others stuff (clock control, etc.) are just nice side benefits.

That being said, I would personally pay money out of my pocket to bring DeAngelo Williams to GB

I seem to remember Rodgers leading at least one 9 minute drive that should have gone for a TD but instead we penalized our way out into a field goal attempt. I also remember some pretty good 6 and 7 minute drives.

All that without a run game.

BTW, the Cowboys and Lions have much better run games than we do and did nothing against the Bears either.

1) Bears scored on a punt return
2) Bears first TD was scored on a short field due to horrible special teams
3) Bears game tying FG was scored on a short field due to the fumble + 30 yards of penalties
4) Bears game winning FG was scored on a short field due to the pass interference penalty

The Bears had a short field and quick scores all night long.

Once again, nobody is calling for a "top tier, blow-em out of the water running game". We just want better than 8 yards in the first half.

Click to expand...

I didn't skew the facts. I gave them to you straight up. Time is time regardless of what happened. Your the one skewing the facts for yourself. Okay guys, you want some startling numbers that football purists are scared to view.

Over the last 2 years, a team that has been bottom 5 in rushing has made it to the superbowl, albeit, they lost. But still. It shows you which way this league is headed.

When the saints won the superbowl, offensively, they called 39 pass plays, and 17 running plays. Such a balanced attack they utilized in that game. And guess what, they won the time of possession battle even though they ran the ball less than the colts.

In fact, they never threw less than 30 times in the playoffs. And the only time they ran a lot was when they smashed the cards so bad, they were just trying to run out the clock pretty much the entire 2nd half.

Open your eyes guys. A running game simply is just not necessary anymore.
It’s nice, but not needed.

USE THE SHORT PASS TO SET UP THE PASS! It works just as well. It’s how the niners maintained a dynasty. It works.

The biggest thing that a running game would provide is some relief on the tackles. The way DEs rush the quarterback and play the run are two VERY different play styles, and most of the holding penalties were caused by Chicago's DEs (Peppers really) being able to put their (his) head(s) down and rush every down as if it were a passing down.

I get what you're all saying, but all those teams had pro bowl pass blockers on the line too. They could handle the DEs coming at them every down better than Clifton and Tauscher can. We need some kind of running game to lessen the pressure on our non pro-bowl pass protection and maybe we wont get a hundred false starts and holding penalties. It would just make our passing game that much better.

Not to mention all of those teams had, at the least, a starting caliber back. We don't even have that. BJax is clearly nothing more than a 3rd down back, and Kuhn is a FULLBACK. I don't think we need a back like DWill or Lynch, but we do need someone who can pick up more than 20 yards on the ground, or has some sort of breakaway potential.

I think it also is a bit of a gamble to be without a running back. Less rushes=more passes. More passes=more hits/hurries/sacks. More hits/hurries/sacks= increased chances of injury. Yeah, Rodgers was pummled for much of last season and came through it ok, yet I don't think he should have to do that every year. A decent, not good, but decent running game keeps defenses honest and slows down the pass rush as the pass rushers have to play run defense. Sure a lot of SB winning teams don't lead the league in rushing but their running game was still good enough to keep defenses honest. I think a decent running game would do a great deal in keeping Rodgers upright.

Hi, long time since I posted here, but I thought I'd add my two cents. It all comes down to the big uglies on the OL. If we block better on runs, we start to wear out their DL. Yes we do a lot of short slants, screens etc that can in pinch do just like a run, but, so many of the problems on this team the last two years has been the OL.

The problem is I don't think its fixed until you get a new Stud LT and a Solid RT to replace who we have. We may have a long year ahead of us depending on how we continue to hold out on the OL. Personally I think we should invest a high pick or two in OL next year. our RBs are probably okay, if we just had better blocking on the edges on passes, and up the gut on runs.

I didn't skew the facts. I gave them to you straight up. Time is time regardless of what happened. Your the one skewing the facts for yourself. Okay guys, you want some startling numbers that football purists are scared to view.

Over the last 2 years, a team that has been bottom 5 in rushing has made it to the superbowl, albeit, they lost. But still. It shows you which way this league is headed.

When the saints won the superbowl, offensively, they called 39 pass plays, and 17 running plays. Such a balanced attack they utilized in that game. And guess what, they won the time of possession battle even though they ran the ball less than the colts.

In fact, they never threw less than 30 times in the playoffs. And the only time they ran a lot was when they smashed the cards so bad, they were just trying to run out the clock pretty much the entire 2nd half.

Open your eyes guys. A running game simply is just not necessary anymore.
It’s nice, but not needed.

USE THE SHORT PASS TO SET UP THE PASS! It works just as well. It’s how the niners maintained a dynasty. It works.